Quotes of the day

posted at 10:37 pm on May 15, 2012 by Allahpundit

Fifty-six percent of Americans think Barack Obama will win the 2012 presidential election, compared with 36% who think Mitt Romney will win. Democrats are more likely to believe that Obama will win than Republicans are to believe Romney will. Independents are nearly twice as likely to think that Obama, rather than Romney, will prevail.

***

The marginal factors in the past four or six weeks have looked slightly better for Mr. Romney than Mr. Obama. The recuperation in Mr. Romney’s favorability numbers, for instance — if it was somewhat to be expected — also reduces the risk that his personal qualities might cause him to lose an election that he otherwise would have won, as during another economic downturn.

Meanwhile, the tumultuous situation in Greece may increase the chance of an economic downside case for Mr. Obama. And data from the domestic economy has not been as strong lately. (Although it might also be mentioned that the situation in the Middle East is thought to be improving, and oil pries have receded somewhat.)

Put another way, if you are being very detail oriented, there is a case to be made that Mr. Romney’s odds of being elected have improved somewhat over the past six weeks.

***

When pollsters call these voting blocs now, many people will likely proclaim their continued loyalty to the president.

They won’t be lying to pollsters about whom they really want to vote for. The issue will be whether they actually go to the booth and vote for Obama.

Many voted in 2008 with the desire to see racism and racists humiliated by having a qualified black man elected president. Especially after eight years of what was not, and still is not, perceived as a successful presidency.

Now, many of these same voters still feel an allegiance to Obama — and he’s their theoretical choice in the election. But along with feeling some allegiance, they also may be left feeling disappointment. And that can lead to a disconnect with what pollsters hear compared with the voters who actually show up on Election Day.

***

But when I look at the data, a slightly different question comes to mind: Why is Obama even close? If you look at the fundamentals, the president should be getting crushed right now…

The key is his post-boomer leadership style. Critics are always saying that Obama is too cool and detached, arrogant and aloof. But the secret to his popularity through hard times is that he is not melodramatic, sensitive, vulnerable and changeable. Instead, he is self-disciplined, traditional and a bit formal. He is willing, with drones and other mechanisms, to use lethal force.

Normally, presidents look weak in these circumstances, overwhelmed by events. But Obama has displayed a kind of ESPN masculinity — postfeminist in his values, but also thoroughly old-fashioned in style — hypercompetitive, restrained, not given to self-doubt, rarely self-indulgent. Administrations are undone by scandal and moments when they look pathetic, but this administration, guarded in all things, has rarely had those moments.

***

In that view, the primary fundamentals are these: Obama is the incumbent. The economy is growing at a moderate pace. There’s no serious third-party challenge. We’re not losing massive numbers of soldiers in a foreign war. And when you look at those fundamentals, the reality is this: Incumbent presidents very, very rarely lose under those conditions…

If I seem pedantic on this point, it’s because this is one of my pet peeves in political commentary: Pundits take political situations that can be explained through the fundamentals and then attribute them, without any evidence, to the telegenic characteristics of individual politicians or the messaging decisions made by their campaigns. Then, a few years later, the fundamentals turn around, and suddenly our great communicator has forgotten how to give a speech or run a campaign — or vice versa. Remember that in 1982, Ronald Reagan was under 40 percent in the polls. Then the economy rebounded, and he romped to victory in the election.

***

There has been nothing very cool about the past 7 weeks for Obama. The president has twisted himself into a policy and rhetorical pretzel to win the support and money he needs from the members of the Democratic coalition.

If Democrats don’t want to see Obama defeated, they had better suck it up. Obama is not the superman they believe him to be, nor is his campaign the masterwork they have been led to believe.

The president knows how tight a spot he is in. His supporters are just now realizing it.

***

Had this been an isolated event, Democrat campaign professionals might not be all that concerned. Mistakes, after all, are made. But this was hardly a “one off.” There are, in the view of many Democratic pros, far too many other examples of the Obama campaign making a hash of fairly straightforward political matters…

The mishandling of the President’s endorsement of same sex marriage sent the president’s re-election prospects into a tailspin; electoral college handicappers busily moved North Carolina from “toss-up” to “likely Republican.” And it necessitated today’s “let’s-get-the-media-talking-about-something-else” news event (the Bain attack ad).

Because we have been told for so long that Team Obama is the very model of the modern campaign operation, we have come to sort of believe it. In reality, they’ve been surprisingly inept since they set up shop last year. They’ve been through three slogans and four over-arching re-election “themes.” They’ve made a big deal out of Romney’s dog. They’ve introduced us to “Julia,” which seemed like a right-wing parody of the perfect constituent of the nanny state. One could on (and on).

“But Obama has displayed a kind of ESPN masculinity — postfeminist in his values, but also thoroughly old-fashioned in style — hypercompetitive, restrained, not given to self-doubt, rarely self-indulgent.”

“But Obama has displayed a kind of ESPN masculinity — postfeminist in his values, but also thoroughly old-fashioned in style — hypercompetitive, restrained, not given to self-doubt, rarely self-indulgent.”

Fifty-six percent of Americans think Barack Obama will win the 2012 presidential election, compared with 36% who think Mitt Romney will win. Democrats are more likely to believe that Obama will win than Republicans are to believe Romney will. Independents are nearly twice as likely to think that Obama, rather than Romney, will prevail.

Julia might as well have been created by the Romney campaign. I’m not sure if that was a sign they need to fire up their base, or if they really believe the thought that women are so weak that they need government nurturing every step of the way is something that plays well with persuadables. Either way, my big takeaway from that fiasco was that they’re in a good bit of trouble.

wait till Willard the coward has to leave the Fox News bunker and face the MSM, he’ll trip up badly and his team knows it. Romney has to answer questions about Romneycare and his hawkish foreign policy eventually. Obama is gonna cream him in the debates and open up a solid lead thereafter.

The reason unemployment numbers are going down is that they are using Social Security disability as extended unemployment for hundreds of thousands. They slide off the radar screen but the inevitable crash is drawing nearer.

“But Obama has displayed a kind of ESPN masculinity — postfeminist in his values, but also thoroughly old-fashioned in style — hypercompetitive, restrained, not given to self-doubt, rarely self-indulgent.”

Postfeminist values ≠ masculinity.

I had to look up who actually wrote this stuff. I expect some of the ESPN commentators to sue him!

This, fellow commenters, was brought to you by David Brooks, who wrote the ode to the “perfectly creased pant.”

Fifty-six percent of Americans think Barack Obama will win the 2012 presidential election, compared with 36% who think Mitt Romney will win. Democrats are more likely to believe that Obama will win than Republicans are to believe Romney will. Independents are nearly twice as likely to think that Obama, rather than Romney, will prevail.

There is no eeyore here. Republicans reasonably fear that the election can be stolen but are unsure how many dead votes can be produced. Democrats just know that number.

My dem neighbor said tonight he is giving up reading/watching the left’s sites. He asked if the dems ever went to high school. He said when they went after Romney for such a stupid teen age stunt he’s given up on them. Great, just when I thought I would try and avoid him because I thought he was too smart to fall for 0b0z0’s line. And I guess he is!

In that view, the primary fundamentals are these: Obama is the incumbent. The economy is growing at a moderate pace. There’s no serious third-party challenge. We’re not losing massive numbers of soldiers in a foreign war. And when you look at those fundamentals, the reality is this: Incumbent presidents very, very rarely lose under those conditions…

How about these fundamentals? The economy is anemic. The debt is driving us off a cliff. Record unemployment. Two-thirds of the country HATES Obamacare and the way it was rammed down our throats. Gas prices have skyrocketed. The EPA is out of control.

It was an incredible read and helped put pieces of the puzzle together for me.

JPeterman on May 15, 2012 at 11:22 PM

I have not read the book but find her intelligent and erudite, misguided philosophically/politically, but a much more presentable and international dame than Hillary. Hillary is down right creepy of late.

I hold against Albright that she sipped champagne with that N. Korean thug and that she yaks nonsense on shows/C-Span.

Still, she could have been president in Europe if she wanted to. She’s had an interesting life and achieved much, in spite of all.

I hope Rmoney™ does take the necessary steps to get this ship turned around and heading back to port. I hope he realizes that by taking the proper measures he might well be a one term President himself. I hope he does the correct thing for the sake of our great Nation. He needs to be prepared to sacrifice his own ambitions and do so for our sake. Time will tell.

In that view, the primary fundamentals are these: Obama is the incumbent. The economy is growing at a moderate pace. There’s no serious third-party challenge. We’re not losing massive numbers of soldiers in a foreign war. And when you look at those fundamentals, the reality is this: Incumbent presidents very, very rarely lose under those conditions…

Umm, yes, yes, you are correct that incumbents very rarely lose when that is the reality.

Unfortunately, the only thing that is true in the opinion article is the statement that “Obama is the incumbent”

The economy growing at a moderate pace? Yeah, I guess if you consider 1 or 2% to be “moderate”. Hey, at least it’s not shrinking, right?

We’re not losing massive numbers of soldiers in a foreign war? Anybody seen the latest casualty number from Afghanistan? Yeah, me neither.

Let’s look at a few more of those fundamentals, shall we?

Unemployment rate going down? Only because more and more people are falling off the unemployment rolls due to not finding work and no longer seeking work. Lowest workforce participation rate in decades.

No mention of gasoline prices. Averaged $1.84 when Bush left office, we’re about 2x that now.

Yeah, those are great stats for an incumbent. If you’ve got the press in your back pocket. Oh, wait. But even that isn’t going to work because you can’t tell someone out of work and unable to afford gasoline that everything is coming up roses. It won’t work

Still, she could have been president in Europe if she wanted to. She’s had an interesting life and achieved much, in spite of all.

Schadenfreude on May 16, 2012 at 12:07 AM

Thanks for your insight. She didn’t know she was Jewish until 1997 and her father appears to have been her driving force. The memoir is not some mushy family stuff, but a well researched and well written piece of history.

Rice’s initial college major was piano, but after realizing she did not have the talent to play professionally, she began to consider an alternative major.She attended an international politics course taught by Josef Korbel, which sparked her interest in the Soviet Union and international relations. Rice later described Korbel (who was the father of Madeleine Albright, a future U.S. Secretary of State), as a central figure in her life.

You have GOT to check out Twitchy on Obama’s rewriting of the official presidents’ bios on whitehouse.gov.

My favorite contribution.

John the Libertarian on May 15, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Here I thought I was pretty much shock proof about anything he might pull, but I could hardly believe that. For some naive reason I thought those bios were done by some Library of Congress historian, if not former aides to a President, and that they were most definitely not up for revision. It’s a childishly pathetic display of look at me, except that it’s being done by the WH.